d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
By whose definition? Pretty sure the folks who defend race-conscious admissions policies have a different one than you do.Race-based admissions are racist by definition.
By whose definition? Pretty sure the folks who defend race-conscious admissions policies have a different one than you do.Race-based admissions are racist by definition.
Anyone who likes is welcome to present a countervailing definition for our discussion. Bonus points if it appeals to punching up, or the progressive stack.By whose definition? Pretty sure the folks who defend race-conscious admissions policies have a different one than you do.
Do you contend there is a “glass ceiling” exception written into federal antidiscrimination law, or are you just saying there ought to be?I'm waiting, with bated breath, for theprestige to discover 'the glass ceiling'.
It appears that you are asking a loaded question to a strawman.Do you contend there is a “glass ceiling” exception written into federal antidiscrimination law, or are you just saying there ought to be?
It appears you are jumping in before the person I was talking to had a chance to respond.It appears that you are asking a loaded question to a strawman.
I'm well aware of the phenomenon. I just disagree that explicitly sex-based privilege is the solution.I'm waiting, with bated breath, for theprestige to discover 'the glass ceiling'.
A phallacy is a phallacy, no matter if it was responded to or not.It appears you are jumping in before the person I was talking to had a chance to respond.
Neither. He's contending that I'm ignorant, for not wanting to ignore federal antidiscrimination law if ignoring it would give women an advantage based on their sex.Do you contend there is a “glass ceiling” exception written into federal antidiscrimination law, or are you just saying there ought to be?
As yes, the dreaded argumentum ex phallo.A phallacy is a phallacy, no matter if it was responded to or not.
I'm aware that it was a once a phenomenon.I'm well aware of the phenomenon. I just disagree that explicitly sex-based privilege is the solution.
What's your proposed solution?I'm well aware of the phenomenon. I just disagree that explicitly sex-based privilege is the solution.
Equal pay for equal work. Equal benefits for both sexes. If access to company leadership is beneficial to one's career, then make sure that female employees get the same access as male employees.What's your proposed solution?
My solution is diversity in hiring, equity in remuneration, and inclusion so that everyone has a chance.Equal pay for equal work. Equal benefits for both sexes. If access to company leadership is beneficial to one's career, then make sure that female employees get the same access as male employees.
What's your proposed solution? Give benefits to women, and withhold them from men, until you're satisfied that the glass ceiling has been shattered?
How do you do this without actual policy?Equal pay for equal work. Equal benefits for both sexes. If access to company leadership is beneficial to one's career, then make sure that female employees get the same access as male employees.
What's your proposed solution? Give benefits to women, and withhold them from men, until you're satisfied that the glass ceiling has been shattered?
You don't. There is actual policy supporting the goals I listed. That policy does not include blatantly sexist (and also illegal) implementations.How do you do this without actual policy?